A proposition for a rating system regarding physical attractiveness
Feeling a need to contribute to humanity, Mastern hereby releases his latest pseudoscientific studies in his absolutely world famous blog, read by millions!
A proposition for a rating system regarding physical attractiveness and how to empirically determine of a specific person and the physical attractiveness of different races/nationalities.
Background
Physical attractiveness is usually described on a ten grade scale ranging from 1 (Lowest) to 10 (Highest). Although a logical scale used to rate a lot of different factors in life, such as work performance, entertainment value, quality etc, I have identified at least three reasons why this scale is inaccurate for rating physical attractiveness
1. Unclear definitions: Using a ten grade scale with no clear boundaries between the steps makes it uncertain what the different steps means, While some people for instance might live under the notion that a 10 on the scale simply means really hot, others might argue that ten means person with a beauty unsurpassed to anyone else, thus never using the extreme values of the scale
2. Unused ratings on the scale: Too many stages as well as uncertainty about the implicit meaning of some of the stages mean that some stages are seldom used. Another difficulty on the scale is that the average value is 5.5 a value not even on the scale
3. Does not reflect reality in nature. As Physical attractiveness is judged in comparison with other entities there should logically be as many attractive as ugly members of population following a standard derivation curve. The scale of today has no such ambitions.
Of the three reasons the third is the biggest issue against the current 10 grade scale. A scale aiming to describe nature which is not based on nature is flawed to a point of termination.
My proposition
My proposition is that the current scale is replaced with a seven grade scale based on Standard derivation. Based on Standard derivation a five or nine grade scale is also possible but in my opinion the five grade scale flaws from too few steps while the nine grade scale simply will never be used at the extreme values due to the form of a standard derivation curve.
On the diagram above can the basis for the scale be viewed. Replace U with the value 4 and the centre of the curve has been established. In order to avoid Decimal values always round a value to the closest integer value thus all subjects who is 3.5-4.4 will be rated as 4 on the scale and so on. The scale I propose is a scale based on falling attractiveness thus 1 being the highest level of beauty and 7 being the most horrendous depths of repulsiveness. Of course the order is just a matter of preference and perhaps the scale should be reversed to better reflect the common idea that a higher number is better. Anyway the scale I propose is the following (Reverse scale within parenthesis)
1 (7) Eye Catching Beauty Description: The very few that actually catches your eyes, a few glimpses will probably be remembered for days due to the rarity of this event. Approximate part of population 1 % (every value< 1.4 on the scale above, due to the rounding)
2 (6): Attractive: Description: The common attractive person a look will probably show a lot of positive physical attributes, and a few or none negative. Nothing that really mesmerize the viewer though. Approximate part of population 10 % (Values between 1.5 to 2.4)
3 (5): Cute: Description: A person with several positive attributes as well as some negative and plain ones. The kind of person that easily could qualify as attractive if the viewer is affected by feelings. Approximate Part of population 20% (Values between 2.5-3.4)
4 (4): Plain: A person without anything distinguishable in the way of physical appearance. A balance of positive, negative and plain attributes. The person you could easily pass by the way to work every day without noticing. Approximate Part of population 38 % (Values between 3.5-4.4)
5 (3): Ugly: A person with several negative features and nothing positive to weigh up the scales. Nothing remarkably ugly though. Approximate part of population 20 % (Values between 4.5-5.4)
6(2): Very Ugly: Almost exclusively ugly features and most often a heavy overweight. Approximate part of population 10 % (Values between 5.5-6.4)
7(1) Freakshow/ Horror for the Eyes: A person so extremely ugly and disgusting that you can’t miss to see them. Most people would rather chew their own arm off, than having intercourse with this category Approximate part of population 1 % (Values above 6.5)
How to rate the attractiveness of a single individual
To actually give an objective rating regarding the specific attractiveness of one single individual is of course a very difficult assignment. To actually make an attempt however to factors are required.
1: A large enough group to rate the physical attractiveness of the individual.
2: A large enough group of other persons rated to actually make a relevant rating.
Of course the only way to make a 100 % true measurement is to ask every human available, this is however not feasible, but instead the methodology of polls will be used for instance by asking 100 random people about their opinion. To get a reference a comparative material of at least 100 persons is also to be rated. Thus 100 persons each rating the appearance of 100 random subjects of the same sex and age, where the subject to be rated is one of them, will give a very close estimate of the subjects attractiveness. To avoid Bias were different people interprets the scale differently, the interesting thing is not the actually rated average score, but how good the average is compared to reference group.
To give an example of this. Let’s say that a person gets an average score of 1,5 from the poll and this means that the person get a better score than 97,9 % of the reference group. Compared to the reference group the persons rating is 2.0 on the relative scale (as seen on the standard derivation curve -2u, 2.1 % ). Of course there are sources of insecurity, but the more raters and the bigger reference group that is used, the source of insecurity is lowered.
How to rate the attractiveness of a race/nationality
My approach to rating the attractiveness of a specific race/nationality is in a way very similar to the way of rating the attractiveness of an individual. As with the individual a number of randomized persons needs to be rated for reference. Different to finding out the value of an individual however, the important factor is not the rating of a specific person but the average rating of a group.
Let’s give an example. Ten different nations claim in their advertisement that the women of that country are the most beautiful in the world. To really know which claim is correct the following method can be used. 100 women from each country of same age are chosen randomly. The people in the test panel rate all the 1000 individuals. The average value of every country’s contribution is calculated. A comparative table is made. And the answer gets solved. As in the case with the individual the greater the span of the test is, the more accurate the survey will be.
Reflections
This kind of research is as far as I know not being conducted anywhere in the world. It is indeed a sad thing that humanity has not reached further in the quest for knowledge. Especially the lack of comparative research between nationalities/races is tragic as it could greatly raise the national prestige to keep track of these things, as well as help individuals who want to know where to hunt for a mating partner. Finally it would bring light to the question whether British people is the ugliest of the European race or not.
// Mastern
